WETSU Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Umm, the answer, LOL! How about the fact that you either can't, or just refuse, to look at the big picture. You're looking at it from one side and refuse to admit your team just might be wrong. I'm looking at it from both sides and can, and have, expressed the stupidity taken from both sides. No. YOUR answer is not THE answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 You're right, football in the 20's wasn't the same as in the 80's. But it also isn't the same today as it was in the 90's. That is my point. So many fans (high school, college, or pro) want to exclude particular points in time for that specific reason. Yet they fail to realize, if you're going to omit a period of time when the game changed, well that includes much more than pre-WW2. You can't pick and choose which ones count and which ones don't...because then everyone will have a different reason why one era counts and one doesn't. So you do have to count every game that was played. Because that is one thing that will never change...they were played. I'm not picking and choosing because of a wanting to make my team look better reason. I'm posting because of a event that changed the Aggies as a school. It's much different than what your thinking. The Aggies were literally at a recruiting handicap. They are now on equal footing and haw since made the series a very competitive one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobo97 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 I'm not picking and choosing because of a wanting to make my team look better reason. I'm posting because of a event that changed the Aggies as a school. It's much different than what your thinking. The Aggies were literally at a recruiting handicap. They are now on equal footing and haw since made the series a very competitive one. I think you'll have a hard time finding anyone outside of College Station that agrees that 9-3 since 2000 is "very" competitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 I think you'll have a hard time finding anyone outside of College Station that agrees that 9-3 since 2000 is "very" competitive. Why just use the 12 years of late? I was comparing from the day non corps players were allowed in until now. That includes the good and the bad from both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Also by that logic, OU is 9-3 against Texas the last 12 meetings, yet you still consider it competitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobos2004 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Also by that logic, OU is 9-3 against Texas the last 12 meetings, yet you still consider it competitive. LOL whoops! Silly WET, don't you know that all of these people know why A&M did what they did? It was obviously to get away from Texas. And since they have no proof whatsoever to back up that claim, it is obviously the true answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h-town12 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Also by that logic, OU is 9-3 against Texas the last 12 meetings, yet you still consider it competitive. Ohhhh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Did a little digging and I was wrong. Texas is 4-8 against OU over ther last 12. But it got me thinking about Texas and their "true rival." The claim OU as the true rival, because it's more competitive, but for the last 10-15 years it hasn't been. Average margin of victory is 10 points. Texas has 2 conference titles in that span, OU has 7. That series isn't near as competitive as Texas fans want to believe lately. It's not any more competitive than what A&M and Texas had going the last decade or so. Both are one sided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobo97 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Also by that logic, OU is 9-3 against Texas the last 12 meetings, yet you still consider it competitive. Show me where I, or any other Horn fan for that matter, has said the Texas-OU game has been more competitive as of late than the Texas-Texas A&M game. What we have said, is it has become a bigger rivalry...which it has. What makes it a bigger rivalry is what is at stake. That game usually has Conference Title and/or a NC birth on the line. While the winner has gone on to play in one of those two (if not both), the loser has still made a high quality bowl...usually a BCS! The only thing usually on the line in the Texas-Texas A&M game is whether or not A&M makes a bowl....ohhhhhhh (that's for you htown!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobo97 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Why just use the 12 years of late? I was comparing from the day non corps players were allowed in until now. That includes the good and the bad from both sides. I wasn't going by the number of years, but by an even year (2000). However, if you want to go by an even number of years, okay. In the last 10 it's still 7-3. Still doesn't make the comment any weaker does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobo97 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 LOL whoops! Silly WET, don't you know that all of these people know why A&M did what they did? It was obviously to get away from Texas. And since they have no proof whatsoever to back up that claim, it is obviously the true answer. Proof? You mean other than all the crying and complaining the last two years? Texas thinks the conference is all about them. Texas makes more money. Texas gets their own network. Etc, etc, etc. So if it's not about Texas, then why does every complaint include Texas? But you do bring up a good point about proof. You're basically implying it had nothing to do with Texas. Okay, there are many comments most people would claim as "proof" that it does (just listed several for you above), so show some "proof" that it didn't! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Show me where I, or any other Horn fan for that matter, has said the Texas-OU game has been more competitive as of late than the Texas-Texas A&M game. What we have said, is it has become a bigger rivalry...which it has. What makes it a bigger rivalry is what is at stake. That game usually has Conference Title and/or a NC birth on the line. While the winner has gone on to play in one of those two (if not both), the loser has still made a high quality bowl...usually a BCS! The only thing usually on the line in the Texas-Texas A&M game is whether or not A&M makes a bowl....ohhhhhhh (that's for you htown!) This is highly inaccurate and a little over stretched, but continue.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobo97 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 This is highly inaccurate and a little over stretched, but continue.... If you're going to make a comment like that, it would make sense to point out the inaccuracies. That said, let's hear them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 If you're going to make a comment like that, it would make sense to point out the inaccuracies. That said, let's hear them. For starters, only twice have OU and Texas both finished with 1 loss between the two. That means that only twice has the game between Texas and OU truly decided a conference or national championship. That's 2008 and 2009. Every other year one team or the other lost multiple games, so that game didn't really have as much impact as you think. As for the A&M/Texas game determining if the ags bowl chances, only once in the last 12 have the ags been 5-6 and the Texas game determined their bowl status. So your theory is not accurate. It's over stretched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobo97 Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 This is highly inaccurate and a little over stretched, but continue.... Since 2000, only 3 times has anyone other than Texas or OU won the Big 12. The last time neither team was even represented in the game was 1998. Also since 2000, only twice has neither Texas or OU been in a BCS game. So tell me exactly where my comment was inaccurate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobo97 Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 For starters, only twice have OU and Texas both finished with 1 loss between the two. That means that only twice has the game between Texas and OU truly decided a conference or national championship. That's 2008 and 2009. Every other year one team or the other lost multiple games, so that game didn't really have as much impact as you think. As for the A&M/Texas game determining if the ags bowl chances, only once in the last 12 have the ags been 5-6 and the Texas game determined their bowl status. So your theory is not accurate. It's over stretched. The A&M bowl comment was just a shot. The Texas-OU game, exactly as I said. Look at my previous comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immortal13 Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 I wonder if all these whining little aggy @#$%!@ will finally stop crying about Texas after they are officially in the SEC? That's all I am hoping for. What a bunch of vaginas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bordertown Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Texas fans are out of their mind if they think that playing tcu is on par with the LSS. TCU is an opponent, not a rival. Time will tell if it is another one sided in state rivalries such as Baylor & Tech. I think Texas fans believe in today's world of college football it will be a quality football game. The quality of the game will not see a drop off. If TCU and Texas are playing for major bowl bids it will be just as intense. It is true the story lines will not be as intriguing. Now if the Aggies believe the LSS was on par with the RRR, they are sadly mistaken. The location and ticket allocations make it a special game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Since 2000, only 3 times has anyone other than Texas or OU won the Big 12. The last time neither team was even represented in the game was 1998. Also since 2000, only twice has neither Texas or OU been in a BCS game. So tell me exactly where my comment was inaccurate! Your statement is inaccurate because of the reasons Texas and OU won the titles. It's not because of one game upset over the other. It's because the big 12 has been an extremely top heavy conference until the last 2-3 years. The south teams dominated the north and texas and OU dominated the south. My point was not that the RRR didn't feature good teams. You are accurate that they both went on to win big things. What my point was, is that it's not like that one game settled it. Texas fans act like the RRR was virtually a MNC semifinal game when it wasn't. Both teams lost multiple games after losing to the other. The only time that game truly had as much implications as people make it out to, was 2008 ad 2009. Every other year the loser went on to lose multiple games and finish 9-3ish. How can you not see my point? If there were 5-6 times over the last decade where the winner basically went 12-0 and the loser went 11-1 then I see your point. But it's not like that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawemoff Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Ok so if you divorce your wife, but tell her you still want to have sex, she should be ok with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h-town12 Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Ok so if you divorce your wife, but tell her you still want to have sex, she should be ok with that? Isn't that what any warm-blooded man should want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawemoff Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Isn't that what any warm-blooded man should want? Yes, but that doesn't make it right. Sometimes you have to let her get over the grieving phase first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudaSooner Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Yes, but that doesn't make it right. Sometimes you have to let her get over the grieving phase first.:lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 I wonder if all these whining little aggy @#$%!@ will finally stop crying about Texas after they are officially in the SEC? That's all I am hoping for. What a bunch of vaginas. Using language and calling people inappropriate names on a message board? You got your butt kicked a lot as a kid didnt you lol. Take it somewhere else buddy, we don't need your attitude problem anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WETSU Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Ok so if you divorce your wife, but tell her you still want to have sex, she should be ok with that? That's not really the same situation... Think of it like The ags taking a better job offer that requires them to work out of town. The ags would still come home a couple times a year and make it happen, but Texas decided they would rather divorce than make it work. There is absolutely nothing that says the Aggies leaving is a divorce. They just saw a great opportunity and took it. Texas can be bitter about it all they want, but it's not the Aggies not willing to work it out. It's Texas. Think of this situation from an Aggies point of view just for a second. Seriously.... What is truly the big deal about the Aggies going to the sec? They paid their exit fees. They were not looking to slander any other schools during the process. The big 12 is still in tact and looking good with a new tv deal and all.... There is absolutely nothing to be "upset" about from the Texas side IMO. They are neither hurt nor benefiting from the Aggies move to the sec. The motives for Texas to not play A&M anymore are simply nothing more than spite... Would the LSS still be good? Probably better than ever with the whole SEC vs Big 12 thing going. It would get the attention of almost all of the SEC tv sets that normally didn't care about the game. This game really has a chance to reach a national appeal from a sec vs big 12 point of view. So outside of playing Bama LSU USC or ND every season, I just don't see how Texas will find a "better" matchup for them every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now